Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: Glosa 1000

Xavier Abadia ("Xavier Abadia" <xabadiar@...>) on October 8, 2011

Saluta Ian, mi plu reakti post tu plu reakti :

[Ian] Hi Xavi, I agree t= hat it would be preferable if THERE WERE a systematic way of deriving Glosa= words from Latin/Greek.

[Xavi] Actually THERE IS a systematic way of deri= ving words from Latin/Greek at the original Glosa, inherited from Interglos= sa in the main. Latin: -a < -a -ae ; -i < -us -i ; -a < -um -i ; -i < -= is -is ; -io < -io -ionis ; -u < -us =96us. Greek: -a < -a, -es (“glosa”)= ; -a < -a, -atos (“soma”); -o < -os -ou (“bio”); -a < -on, -ou (“zoa”). = Etc.

[Ian] From what I understand, the authors of Glosa tried to derive Gl= osa words from the English cognates rather than directly from the classical= roots.

[Xavi] I don’t think so. Of course there may be exceptions to the = systematic rules above, for example to take -us from -us -i. But anyway, th= e exceptions remain few, I think.

[Ian] There are some notes on Glosa word= derivation on the Glosa web site that you might find interesting: http://w=

[Xavi] The doubts I have, find no answers in thi= s website. The initial reform by Ron Clark is clear to me: an orthographica= l reform, the suppression of the compulsory final =96e of verbs and the com= pulsory final =96o of abstract qualities. As for the more recent reforms, h= ere is where my confusion comes: what further reforms were made?, by who?, = when?, by which method? If I find the answers, so much the better. If not, = nevermind… I do believe that an essential lexicon like “Glossa 1000” migh= t be sufficient.


— In, Ian Niles <ian_n= iles@…> wrote:

Hi Xavi, I agree that it would be preferable i= f there were a systematic way of deriving Glosa words from Latin/Greek. Fr= om what I understand, the authors of Glosa tried to derive Glosa words from= the English cognates rather than directly from the classical roots. There= are some notes on Glosa word derivation on the Glosa web site that you mig= ht find interesting: -Ian To: glosal= From: xabadiar@… Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 19:36:41 += 0000 Subject: [glosalist] Re: Glosa 1000


= Hi, Ian.

I’m not so sure that the latest variant of a Glosa word w= orks better than the oldest variant. I’ve seen that the oldest variants of = Glosa may be often predicted according to its etymology, in the same way as= the words of Interglossa, because the morphologic arrangement of Interglos= sa was mainly preserved: from Latin =96a =96ae, =96us =96i, =96um =96i, =96= is =96is, words were taken with endings =96a, =96i, =96a, =96i, respectivel= y. Glosa was born as just an orthographical reform of Interglossa, as far a= s I know.

So, I like the original words of Glosa not because they are = the original and “sacrosanct” variants, but because they seem to me more pr= edictable and simple than the latest variants. And this make them more frie= ndly to me.

Once I’ve said this, I now repeat that I would accep= t the fact that most authors of GID have given preference to the latest var= iants, they might have good reasons I ignore. I only reject the unfair meth= od of marking an “X” to the oldest variants as if they were completely obso= lete and useless. Perhaps a fairer method would be to let the oldest varian= ts out of the “Centra Glosa” list, while letting them stay at the “Mega Glo= sa” list with no kind of negative mark.

Saluta, Xavi.

= — In, Ian Niles <ian_niles@> wrote:


Hi Xavi, From what I’ve seen, the words marked with an “X”= are all variants of words that are allowed (at least in mega Glosa). As I= understand it, some variants of essentially the same word were included in= some Glosa lists, and other variants of the same word were included in oth= er Glosa lists. When the various lists were combined into a single diction= ary (viz. the GID), obviously one variant had to be selected as the officia= l version of the word and the others had to be deprecated. I think you wou= ld agree that having more than one variant of the same word for many words = in a language that is proposed as an international auxiliary language defea= ts the purpose of having an international auxiliary language. Anothe= r point that should be made, I think, is that there shouldn’t be anything s= acrosanct about the first version of an artificial language. In fact, I th= ink the opposite is true. Artificial languages get tested in practice, jus= t like software and any other engineering aritifact. The parts that work w= ell are retained. The parts that don’t work well or don’t work at all shou= ld be rejected or modified. As Jespersen pointed out, in the end an intern= ational auxiliary language rests solely on science and reason. -Ian

= To:

From: xabadiar@

Date: Wed, 5 O= ct 2011 15:29:18 +0000

Subject: [glosalist] Re: Glosa 1000





  Ave, karo Myalee,

It s= eems obvious to me that no-one should change the original Glosa words in fa= vour of substitutes supposedly better. I wonder why they had to substitute = “ami” against “amika”, “apis” against “api”, etc. But my dear friend, they = actually CAN do it, they have ALREADY done it, by giving an “X” mark to man= y words that “should be avoided”, even to essential words from any “Glosa-1= 000 list”. (GID, page 4). In my opinion, the GID might be re-organized: the= “Glosa Centra” list should be the only place where the X-marked words migh= t be excluded. And the “Glosa Mega” list should be the integral list with b= oth the original words and the recent and preferred words. No need to mark = words that “should be avoided”. The words outside the “Glosa Centra” list w= ould be avoided “de facto”; the words inside the “Glosa Centra” would be pr= eferred “de facto”.

Finally, an “English-Glo= sa Centra” list is in my opinion far more necessary than an “English-Glosa = Mega” list.

Saluta, Xavi.


— In, “myaleee n” <myaleee@> wrote= :

ave karo Abadia!

= saluta

1- glosa is very great and u= nique

2- but wendy and Ron incompletely made diction.: l= atin and greek words for each word!!

3- NO-ONE can chan= ge x-sign word or other defects!

4- my opinion: use gid= (big), nobody will blame you, but in beginning

of articl= e tell strange words : bato=3D deep etc

5- esperanto, i= do, lfn , glosa all have defects unchangeable!!!We must tolerate them or le= ave the language :-(

6- I made excellent version of gl= osa> glisa, using only latin words, removing defects and I gladly welcome s= uggestions.



— In, “Xavier Abadia” <x= abadiar@> wrote:

Ave, Gary Miller= e pan-pe.

Vi ski; u diktionaria “GID” habe u signi “X= “ pro plu verba qi “debi gene evita” (“should be avoided”, p. 4). Speci: am= ika, api, asini, et cetera.

Mi amo Interglossa, so mi = prefere plu Glosa verba qi es homo plu Interglosa verba, so: amika, api, as= ini, vice: ami, apis, asinus.

Qo-ka plu-ci verba “debi= gene evita”? GID no explika id…

U-ci qestio es spec= iali dificile, ka plu verba freqe habe u signi “1” e u signi “X” iso-tem! (= Plu verba ko signi “1” apare in uno ex oligo Glosa-1000-lista).


Qo-pe pa decide; plu-ci verba debi gene evita? Qo-ka? Qe Ronald C= lark e Wendy Ashby pa akorda?

Mi es ge-konfusi de GID.=

Saluta, Xavi.


— In, Gary Miller <gm= illernd@> wrote:



Plu verba ko mikro numera 1 in GI= D pa es origi “Glosa 1000.” Plu

Glosa krea-pe, cefa= nu Wendy Ashby, du face ma sistema u-ci verba-fa;

s= eqe-co nu es u neo nomina “Centra Glosa” e u sema ++. U turba pa es;


Glosa 1000 pa faktu habe ma poli de 1000 verba, cefa kaus= a plu itera

de Latino e Helena verba in id; anti-co = id veri nece u ma boni

sistema. “Centra Glosa” nu h= abe proxi 1300 verba– faktu, u ma mikro

qantita de = origi Glosa 1000. (Un homi-face lingua Lojban plus habe

= proxi 1300 verba.)

U bi= bli 18 GRADU AD EURO-GLOSA dice; “Na itera nece sti importa; Glosa


1000 facili pote ergo de ali speci de tema, klude plu forti = tekno

tema, posi ko no-freqe uti de Mega Glosa.” Mi= pa detekti sura veri

u-ci frase, tem uti Centra Glo= sa.

Plus mi pa gene hedo de = tu pedi-bola kanta. Anti-co in Nord Dakota na

unive= rsita sporta grega es “plu Bisona.”



_ _



/\ Gary






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: Glosa 1000 - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.